2012 erga conference 19-21 september 2012

2012 ERGA Conference19-21 September 2012

Karen Nelson, John Clarke & Ian Stoodley, QUT

ERGA WORKSHOPVerifying a SESR-MM: a reality

check!

Establishing a framework for transforming student engagement, success and retention in HEIs:

An Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching funded project ID11-2056:2011-2013

2

The need for an holistic view ...

.... We have now reached the stage where universities must recognise the need for institution-wide approaches to enhancing the first year experience. Responsiveness to the needs of demographic and cultural subgroups demands that student support staff, academics and administrators work together to integrate their efforts and initiatives for the benefit of all students...

Establishing a framework for transforming student engagement, success and retention in HEIs: An Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching funded project ID11-2056:2011-2013

Krause, Hartley, James & McInnis, 2005, ¶8.8.6

3

Workshop ActivitiesPart 1: Setting the scene Background to project:

rationale, significance, & objectives

Beyond the transition pedagogy Overview of maturity models


Part 2: The SESR-MM

Parts of the SESR Model

A worked example

Part 3: Verifying the model Developing a maturity assessment scale Assessing the maturity of one institutional practice Discussion

Part 1: Setting the scene

Focusing on the project ....



4

5

Rationale


Existing bodies of work report on students perceptions and their experiences in higher education (e.g. AUSSE, CEQ, FYEQ, UES, ISB...)

No similar attention to sector-wide assessment of institutional activities designed to enhance students learning experiences

Timing for the sector – WP, performance based funding, compacts, increased attention to HE reputation, quality ...

Concept of a maturity model appealing: Focus on sustainable processes Enable contextual interpretation of activities Assess other organisational imperatives (e.g. Quality, BPM)

6

Project Activities & TimelineKey Activities TimeframeDevelop a SESR Maturity Model (SESR-MM)• Conceptual model from literature analysis (top

down)• Categories derived from practices and processes

identified through workshops in team institutions (bottom up)

Oct 2011 - Sept 2012

Design a SESR Maturity Inventory Feb – Dec 2012

Conduct SESR Maturity Assessments in 3 institutions

• 3 stage process: desk-top audit, workshops & interviews.

Develop a series of Case Studies to explain & describe SESR maturity in the context of each institution.

Feb – April 2013March - May 2013

Publish Institutional Maturity Reports (team institutions)

June - July 2013

Develop & publish a Sector SESR Maturity Model Report (model, case studies & tools)

August - Sept 2013


7

Informing Literature

SESR-MM

Student Engagement

(AUSSE)

Transition Pedagogy

FYEQ Data & Reports

Model of student

engagement

Establishing a framework for transforming student engagement, success and retention in HEIs: An Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching funded project ID11-2056:2011-

2013

Capability

Maturity Models

Maturity Models

Establishing a framework for transforming student engagement, success and retention in HEIs: An Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching funded project ID11-2056:2011-

2013

8

Precursors in Maslow’s (1954) Hierarchy of Needs and Nolan’ (1973, 1979) Stage Theory

Influenced by TQM and the evolutionary stages of practice adoption (Crosby, 1979)

Emergence of Capability Maturity Models Key concepts of org. Mgt derived from TQM Notions of sequential and progressive stages Ideas about capability of s/ware development orgs

CMM frameworks map an improvement path from ad-hoc immature to a mature disciplined processes

9

Features of Maturity Models


Precursor InfluencesTheory, practice, background and history of maturity

models

Discipline theory

and practice

Content:

Categories

Processes

Practices

Dimensions of

maturityMeasures Adequacy

(scale of 4 points)

Maturity of key

practices interpreted for each dimensio

n

10

Content of models


Category (5)

Process (n)

Practices (Nn)

11 Establishing a framework for transforming student engagement, success and retention in HEIs: An Australian Government Office for Learning and Teaching funded project ID11-2056:2011-2013

practices

Ad hoc Delivery

Planned

Defined

Managed

Optimising

Not

ade

quat

e

Part

ially

ade

quat

e

Fully

ade

quat

e

Larg

ely

adeq

uate

Content Dimensions

Adequacy

processes

categories

12

What we have found so far ?SESR Category Example Processes Example Practices

Curricula that engage students in learning

-engaging pedagogies-authentic assessment -feedback processes

-role plays-collaborative learning

Access to support -proactive monitoring-extended service ‘hours’

-monitoring student learning engagement-academic advising

A sense of belonging

-inclusive language & practice-develop successful identity-flexible delivery

-peer programs-cultural competence-communication strategies

Transition pedagogy

-whole of course design -academic & professional

-orientation and transition as a process

Capacity, resources, infrastructure, policy

-staff development -promotion policies -physical & virtual

-technologies that support flexible learning


Part 2: The SESR Maturity Model

Introducing the SESR Maturity Model ....



13

14

Practice

The delivery / provision/visibil

ity of Orientation Programs

A worked example ...


Orientation programs

are available to

students

Access to

SupportTransition

to Uni

No p

rogr

ams a

re

prov

ided

Limite

d di

scre

te

prog

ram

s

Inte

grat

ed su

ite o

f pr

ogra

ms /

a h

olist

ic ap

proa

ch

Gene

ric &

disc

iplin

e pr

ogra

ms

Ad hoc DeliveryPlanned

Process

Category

DefinedManaged

Maturity Assessment:Pervasiveness &

AdequacyDimensionsContent

Optimising

15

SESR Content ... an example


Access to Support

Extended

service hours

Virtual learnin

g adviser

s

Transition to

University

Accessible

information

On-line resourc

es

O- evaluati

on informs design

P – Suite of

ongoing activitie

s

Orientation

Program M – outcome

s are monitore

dD – policies: type and quality

AH – disciplin

e program

s

Not adequate: No discipline programs availablePartially adequate: Some disciplines offer programsLargely adequate: Most disciplines offer programsFully adequate: All faculties / disciplines have programs

16

Indicators of Maturity


Content: Assessing MaturityCategories Access to support Faculty / discipline

orientation and / or transition programs are available to support students.

Processes First year experience & transition

Practices Orientation activitiesPervasiveness:

Indicator Reach

Ad hoc delivery

Faculty/discipline programs Not adequate

Partially adequate

Largely adequate

Fully adequate

Planned Part of suite of transition activities

Defined Policies define program quality & type

Managed Outcomes are monitoredOptimised Evaluation information informs

design

17

Indicators of Maturity


Practice Example:

Orientation programs are available for students

Reach(Adequacy)

N P L F

Pervasiveness(Dimensions)

Ad Hoc DeliveryPlanningDefining

ManagingOptimising

Part 3: Applying the model

Assessing the maturity of SESR processes



18

19

Your turn to map a practice


Content: Assessing MaturityCategories Name a category Name one dimension of

one practice.Processes Name of one process in this category

Practices Name one practicePervasiveness:

Indicator Reach

Ad hoc delivery

Not adequate

Partially adequate

Largely adequate

Fully adequate

PlannedDefined

ManagedOptimised

Thank you for participating in this workshop

Please contact the authors or refer to the project web site for further information about this project.



http://studentengagementmaturitymodel.net/

ERGA WORKSHOPVerifying a SESR-MM: a reality

check!



2012 erga conference 19-21 september 2012

Documents

student engagement

sesr maturity inventoryfeb

funded project id11

australian government

sesr modela

student support staff

higher education institutions

students perceptions